KARACHI, Nov 29: The Sindh High Court has put the provincial government, KDA, KBCA and KMC on notice for Dec 3 in an applications filed by Dr Anwar Ye Bin Ju, a Muslim of Chinese origin, for alleged illegal demolition of his Pak- China Friendship Hospital and Health Centre project and attempts to dispossess him from the said property.
The court also barred the defendants from creating any third party interest in the interim period and ordered the parties to maintain the status quo.
The order was passed by Justice Zahid Kurban Alavi on the application of Dr Anwar Ye Bin Ju, represented by Ziauddin Nasir, advocate, under order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of CPC, read with section 151 of CPC, praying for restraining the defendants from transferring, allowing and encumbering the property in contention.
The application was filed to seek the court’s indulgence in violation of the plaintiff’s vested rights as claimed in a suit for damages seeking Rs100 million payment from the defendants.
The plaintiff, Dr Anwar, a Chinese doctor, who embraced Islam and specializes in acupuncture and physiotherapy, had been granted Pakistan citizenship as he wanted to establish a hospital in Karachi.
The plaintiff was allotted a 3,000-square-yard plot No ST-17 in Block-3, KDA Scheme 5, Clifton, for the purpose. The suit property was an amenity plot of hospital for promotion and provision of medical facilities to the public.
After payments and grant of permission, the plaintiff constructed boundary wall and water tank on the suit property. But on August 8, 1989, the demolition squad of the KDA demolished the entire boundary wall and water tanks besides all structural material and equipment, despite permission from the Karachi Building Control Authority.
The incident was brought to the knowledge of the KDA chief but no response was given to the written communication. It was the case of the plaintiff that after waiting in vain for any remedial step by the KDA, he again approached the KBCA for the approval of building plan, which had been granted in January and April 1992.
Under clause 4 of the terms and conditions, the lease was granted to the plaintiff for 99 years upon payment of full occupancy value, and ground rent was to be paid in advance.
After five years of issuance of the allotment order and after considerable construction was executed, a 99-year lease was executed by the KDA in favour of the plaintiff on March 24, 1993. In 1995, the completion certificate was given by the KBCA.
The plaintiff alleged that in complete defiance of the principles of natural justice and the relevant provisions of law, the KDA (land management) “illegally, arbitrarily and without providing any notice or opportunity of hearing, cancelled the allotment of the suit property through an order dated April 24, 1996.”
The plaintiff claimed that the above-mentioned notice was served upon him a year earlier, ie May 1995. Without notice officials of the KBCA started demolishing the suit property despite disclosure of documents.
The plaintiff had immediately approached the Sindh High Court through a constitutional petition wherein status quo had been granted on June 18, 1996. However, it was reported by Nazir of the court that in disregard of the status quo order the defendants had again carried out demolition of the suit property. The defendants were also sued in a suit for damages, regarding a separate cause of action.
According to the plaintiff, in October this year officers and workers of the defendants were trying to dispossess him from the suit property with the alleged intention of transferring or allotting the same in favour of some other party, in utter violation of terms and conditions.
Apprehending a similar action by the defendants, the plaintiff claimed that the grant of allotment, approval of building plans, grant of relevant NOCs and subsequent execution of a 99-year lease had created a vested right in his favour.
The plaintiff has prayed for declaring that the cancellation of his allotment of the suit property by the defendant No 1 illegal, void, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and without lawful authority. He also prayed to the court for permanently restraining the defendants from illegally dispossessing him from the suit property while at the same time upholding his contentions.
